ArticleEndocrine connections2019
Anti-tumour activity of everolimus and sunitinib in neuroendocrine neoplasms.
Article in Endocrine connections, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- An Update on Novel Pharmacotherapies for the Treatment of Neuroendocrine Tumors.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Assessing the effectiveness and safety of surufatinib versus everolimus or sunitinib in advanced neuroendocrine neoplasms: insights from a real-world, retrospective cohort study using propensity score and inverse probability treatment weighting analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Article
- Resistant gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a definition and guideline to medical and surgical management.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2024Article
- Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms: epidemiology, genetics, and treatment.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Review
- Recent progress of experimental model in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: drawbacks and challenges.Endocrine · 2023Review
- Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms: A clinical snapshot.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2021Review
- Oncolytic vaccinia virus GLV-1h68 exhibits profound antitumoral activities in cell lines originating from neuroendocrine neoplasms.BMC cancer · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Comparisons between everolimus and sunitinib regarding their efficacy and safety in neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are scarce. We retrospectively analysed the clinicopathological characteristics and outcomes in 92 patients with well-differentiated (WD) NEN of different origin (57 pancreatic NENs (PanNENs)), treated with molecular targeted therapy (MTT) with everolimus or sunitinib, first- (73:19) or second-line (sequential; 12:22) for progressive disease. Disease control rates (DCR: partial response or stable disease) at first-line were higher in all patients treated with everolimus than sunitinib (64/73 vs 12/19, P = 0.012). In PanNENs, DCR at first-line everolimus was 36/42 versus 9/15 with sunitinib (P = 0.062). Progression-free survival (PFS) at first-line everolimus was longer than sunitinib (31 months (95% CI: 23.1-38.9) vs 9 months (95% CI: 0-18.5); log-rank P < 0.0001) in the whole cohort and the subset of PanNENs (log-rank P < 0.0001). Median PFS at second-line MTT was 12 months with everolimus (95% CI: 4.1-19.9) vs 13 months with sunitinib (95% CI: 9.3-16.7; log-rank P = 0.951). Treatment with sunitinib (HR: 3.47; 95% CI: 1.5-8.3; P value: 0.005), KI67 >20% (HR: 6.38; 95% CI: 1.3-31.3; P = 0.022) and prior chemotherapy (HR: 2.71; 95% CI: 1.2-6.3; P = 0.021) were negative predictors for PFS at first line in multivariable and also confirmed at multi-state modelling analyses. Side effect (SE) analysis indicated events of serious toxicities (Grades 3 and 4: n = 13/85 for everolimus and n = 4/41 for sunitinib). Discontinuation rate due to SEs was 20/85 for everolimus versus 4/41 for sunitinib (P = 0.065). No additive toxicity of second-line MTT was confirmed. Based on these findings, and until reliable predictors of response become available, everolimus may be preferable to sunitinib when initiating MTT in progressive NENs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.